Hater Depot
Joined: 29 Mar 2005
|
 Posted: Sat Dec 13, 2008 8:35 am Post subject: What's so great about pragmatism? |
 |
|
http://www.amconmag.com/larison/2008/12/12/pragmatism/
| Quote: |
using it as Greenwald does, it is correct to say that we define �what works� based on a whole host of assumptions about what ought to be done and the vision that we have for why we are doing whatever it is we are doing. If we think of it this way, it is impossible to describe �what works� without first laying out an argument explaining why we are trying to make the attempt in the first place. Being able to do something effectively may be entirely undesirable if the thing in question is unjust, exploitative or corrupt.
...
Professing pragmatism is to say that you do not intend to attempt significant change in the structures or practices of government. In the context of this so-called pragmatic �center,� what we might call left and right-leaning instincts are usually a matter of emphasis and style. The �center� defines itself as non-ideological, and insists on identifying anything outside of the narrow band of the consensus as ideological, when this is not the case. This is how �centrists� can wink and nod at torture and support illegal surveillance and aggressive warfare while successfully defining opponents of the same as an ideological �fringe,� and it is how violating other states� sovereignty and trashing constitutional protections are the serious, responsible positions that only �extremists� would question: whichever positions are taken up by �centrists� (i.e., those who enforce the consensus) are automatically defined as the pragmatic, non-ideological, problem-solving positions. |
What Greenwald wrote (in part):
http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/2008/12/08/cia/index.html
| Quote: |
Concerns over torture and rendition -- despite being widespread among countless military officials and intelligence professionals -- are uniformly depicted as nothing more than ideological idiosyncrasies from the dreaded Left ("left-wing hit job on Brennan"; "largely on the left"; "left-leaning bloggers and columnists"; "Obama's liberal base"; Obama's "most ardent supporters on the left"; "liberal critics"; "liberal bloggers"; "confined to liberal blogs"; "the Democratic base").
Thus: non-ideological, pragmatic, Serious centrists (which, as everyone knows, is what we need now) are free of this nattering fixation on all this "torture" talk. Serious adults know that it's time to move on and not hold grudges. It's only the shrill ideologues on the Left who care about such things and want to hold it against those who defended these programs. Depicting one's critics as confined to "the Left" is a time-honored Beltway method for rendering the criticisms unserious, and it's in full force here (and, as Digby ironically notes, it is the Right, far more than the Left, that has waged war against the CIA in recent years; the Left has largely defended the CIA against manipulation and abuse by the Bush White House). |
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
